The Velvet Underground are brilliant, but Nico I am not so sure. Goddamn you Andy Warhol.

IF you liek the velvet underground, you should go lisen to the band Television...there amazing also, album to look up of televisions is MARQUEE MOON. yeah....its verry verry fine...
ohh soo fine...

-the hooker fish

the velvt underground is the shit, i have there four core albums on vinyle and the with nico album is my favorit, heroin and black angle death song....wow..... yeah the albums is set up so well to, i mean sunday morning makes you just....feel so good, and its just one of theoues albums you start and dont skip at all. A strait thrue lisen.

Great album, great review. Simple as that.

I love how people think they're off the hook when they say "It's my opinion, so fuck off."

What if I told you your opinion was uninformed and stupid? I'd be right, because you don't know what you're talking about. Typical ignorant punk stance on the Beatles.

Apparently this reviewer is mentally fucking retarded, because the Beatles were reaching their highest level of musical innovation when this album came out.

The VU wouldn't even exist without the Beatles. Fuck this guy.

homophobia is gay

the guy below me is so gay i can actually feel the gayness from this post. yep, that gay. I bet hes about 14 years old too. And really interested in cnn and haircuts. and plaid shirts. and those really long keychains that say slogans on them. and visors. Dude, give it up, velvet underground is for people who like it in the butt.

"Nobody had ever heard words like, "punk", "glam", or "new wave" until Lou Reed began his career."

Actually nobody heard "punk" as a music form until Mickey Spillaine ranted about the Sex Pistols being "punks" in the other sense of the word, not the jail sense. But VU really did start it all, because Lou Reed was the first to have that attitude about things.

"I dont think these bands would be around if it wasn't for these guys The Televisions, etc."

It's 'Television'. Plain and simple. And they weren't a punk band. I love them, but they were a guitar rock band.

Great stuff. To the guy who wondered wheree Iggy Pop is now, The Stooges stopped when they felt it was the right time to stop, as did Iggy. Instead of going on corny commercial tours for money like alot of other older rock bands, they quit with their dignity intact.

No he didnt. Why do so many people like only music that they want to reflect their attitude? I mean, so many people just like Rancid just because they're labeled as "punk", but they dont kno shit about the Clash, their biggest influence. Oh yeah, the Beatles werent fucking pop. They played in tiny clubs and bars way before they got famous. They've got a hell of a lot more street cred than any new band, if that matters to you.

Guy below, you already lost the argument, let it go.

"you ever seen a hard days night or help? these are not what i would call cinematic mastepieces."--the beatles wrote their own songs. I was just browsing through my brothers elvis cds and out of five ablums equaling 65 songs elvis wrote NONE. So some artists may have some things in common but not enough

"i already addressed this in a post below, yet you seem to dwell on it so i'll add a bit more. none of the motown artists wrote their own songs either, but are you going to question the integrity of those songs? not to mention the number of terrible writers solely in the punk seen should put this to rest."--so it was ok if everyone else didnt write their own music? Well all the boy bands dont write their own stuff so is it ok, and should they still get credit? I think the validity of an artist lies in their songwriting not their good looks.

"so did the beatles, the rolling stones, the ramones and just about every other major rock and roll band in the history of music."--but they werent all about sex appeal, they also had song writing talent.

"i think this a natural part of the music biz. show me any artist who has remained a vital musician for his entire caeer. where was joe strummer in the late 80s-mid 90s? where were the ramones from 1985 on? wheres iggy pop now? what about lou reed? where the #### is lou reed? good enough for you?"--I meant really fallen off like vanilla ice style where they end up to become a las vegas sideshow.

What the fuck is everybodys problem??? The guy wrote a decent review of a great album. Leave him alone and concentrate on the music. I am getting tired of people arguing about the reviewer rather then the music.
Decent review, great album - nothing more.

Hey reviewer guy,

Stop defending your statements with your eliest attitude. The more you try to justify your comments the more immature and silly you look. If I was a reviewer I'd post my review and NEVER reply to the idiots that browse this site. Make a statement, post it and let the punk lemmings either agree with you or poke fun at you. Most these people are idiots. Let them have their Blink and Green Day while the MUSIC FANS can have the real music.

BYE.

Fuck The Beatles? Wow. You are punk fuckin rock. More like just an idiot.

Constructive critism works well with comments. As a reviewer, I state my opinions, and wait for the compliments and/or critisisms. My job is to state my opinion without being biased, well, most opinions are biased so now it becomes thin ice. No matter what, somebody is going to be unhappy, but I was just looking for critisisms that were intelligent rather than childish.

I may have written a shitty review, but I got my point across, which was that the album is amazing, and I told it the way that I wanted to.

"Constructive critism works well."

You kind of threw one of your own points down the drain when you said "Fuck the Beatles". Yes, you stated your own opinion. So now, I am stating MINE, and so are many others. You cant go around bashing good bands and think that nobody will disagree with your opinion. What if I was writing a review about the Buzzcocks first album, and out of the blue started talking about how fake the Ramones were? Plenty people would be upset. (But I like the Ramones, so dont get the wrong idea) From reading the review, you come off as quite uneducated and jerky. I am all for the recognition of the roots of punk on here, like MC 5, Iggy and the Stooges, the New York Dolls, and of course the Velvet Underground, but if I had never heard of the Velvet Underground before, or even if I'd heard about them only a little, I wouldn't want to look into hearing any more of their songs. Hope this helps next time you want to write a review.

-DoDo

yea but yr preaching to the chior

an hey ! slc punk was fun!

Here is what I was trying to do:

This site does not frequently discuss bands that existed at least 20 years ago. I thought it was fair to place a review upon one of the bands that helped start it all.

Here is what happened:

At first, a lot of you got upset because I didn't like the Beatles. But then you realized, oh, shit, that is his opinion, and then the subject was dropped. And now people are attacking me because I cuss and didn't write a review worthy of some punk fanzine. I wasn't out to impress, just inform. If you guys cannot understand what a review is, and that you have the right to disagree or not without resorting to name calling, intelligence bashing, and so on, then don't read reviews. Learn to take varied opinions and then critize me if my facts are wrong or that I am biased.
Constructive critism works well.
If you have a problem with a review, write a better one. I'd be happy to read it. All bark, no bite perhaps.

haah you're kinda dumb...but vu wee....i wish nico would've died before they made this album ..i''m i'mmm sooooo freeeeeeeeee man did i ever tell you how much i hate nico...and how fake she made this band..what was andy thinkin what a jerk!......oh well weeeeEeeeeeEeeEe his album was as punk a the sex pistols if you think about it it was put together and all except for lou reed is no matter what a strong perosnality a chilled voice and an ACCOMPLISHED song writer but andy...w9i9i put the backbone to this project....like that guy1jld sex pistolsssss mwhaha..wee....

thanks. i did this for all of you. i'm just upset that i put my own opinion in this review, rather than all of yours.
hindsight i guess.

I fucking love this fucking album. But the fucking guy who fucking did theis fucking review is a fucking fuck.

I mean, serioulsy, what a wanker.

my favorite artists: rolling stones, johnny cash, blood brothers, at the drive in, johnny thunders, humpers, song of zarathustra,black flag, dead kennedys, minor threat, willie nelson, the germs, ramones, criminals, adolescents, tsol, dfl,beastie boys, X, rancid, white stripes,locust,distillers...ok i like lots of music. But who do you like that could beat up the humpers?

Yeah, I was just being nitpicky. I understood what you meant, I just wanted to make sure that everyone realized that Mick Jagger used to be the man.

Game. Set. Match.

***raises JONBONBANDERSNATCH's hand in victory***

you're right. prince would be another good example of a viable artist playing up sex.

i think my main point was that there were definitley more overtly sexual artists that could be better linked to nsync in that way than elvis.

4. elvis was more about sex appeal than music, nsync is all about sex appeal also.

mick jagger anyone?

Are we talking post- or pre-Exile on Main Street? After Exile, he was all about sex appeal, sure. Exile and earlier he did a good job mixing the two. So, basically, while Mick Jagger was still a relevant rockandroller, he NEVER emphasized sex appeal over music. Sure, he mixed them, but that's not what the other guy was arguing.

lets break this down:

1. elvis starred in crappy movies, nsync star in crappy movies.

you ever seen a hard days night or help? these are not what i would call cinematic mastepieces.

2. elvis didnt write his own music, nsync doesnt either.

i already addressed this in a post below, yet you seem to dwell on it so i'll add a bit more. none of the motown artists wrote their own songs either, but are you going to question the integrity of those songs? not to mention the number of terrible writers solely in the punk seen should put this to rest.

3. elvis appealed to teenage girls, nsync appeals to teenage girls.

so did the beatles, the rolling stones, the ramones and just about every other major rock and roll band in the history of music.

4. elvis was more about sex appeal than music, nsync is all about sex appeal also.

mick jagger anyone?

5. elvis' career turned out to fall off a cliff, as will nsyncs.

i think this a natural part of the music biz. show me any artist who has remained a vital musician for his entire caeer. where was joe strummer in the late 80s-mid 90s? where were the ramones from 1985 on? wheres iggy pop now? what about lou reed? where the fuck is lou reed? good enough for you?

6. Now the argument is over, douche. ANd your comment about elvis starting punk is laughable, he just stole the black mans music and made cool because he was white.

yes the argument is over, but i dont recall anytime i said elvis started punk. either someone else said that or you're putting words in my mouth.

if elvis stole "black mans" music then so did every artist who ever used a blues progression in any of their songs which is almost every rock and roll band that has ever existed. right off, i can only think of hound dog as the only hit song that elvis actually covered and it sounds quite different from the original. i hope you got some more to prove your point. and dont try and throw out original songs he didn't write but was the first to perform.

i wont say elvis started punk rock, but i will say for definite that if no white artist "stole" black music and broughtit to mainstream attention there would be no punk rock. ther would be no rock and roll period. you're arguing against gravity and it makes me laugh. i laugh at you for putting up such nonsense and i laugh at myself for taking the time to write a response to your meaningless, baseless opinion.

heres a small suggestion. you wanna make a bold claim like comparing elvis and nsync, i would suggest that you put a little more effort into supporting your argument instead of just putting down simple-minded comparisons of what you think. it may work with your friends who prolly dont know shit about music history, but it doesn't work here.

why exactly does music have to belong to a certain colour? elvis was about breaking boundaries, punk rock was about breaking boundaries. case closed.

elvis starred in crappy movies, nsync star in crappy movies. elvis didnt write his own music, nsync doesnt either. elvis appealed to teenage girls, nsync appeals to teenage girls. elvis was more about sex appeal than music, nsync is all about sex appeal also. elvis' career turned out to fall off a cliff, as will nsyncs. Now the argument is over, douche. ANd your comment about elvis starting punk is laughable, he just stole the black mans music and made cool because he was white

"And then you hear Nico. Her voice from Heaven."

Um, Ripperwalk, the VU hated Nico. She was just put in there to gain plublicity.

Does this reviewer realize how much cursing makes me think the person that wrote this is some inbred from (insert stereotypical hillbilly state)? Fuck it all! I love Elvis, The Beatles, and the Velvet Underground, so it IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE!!! And yes, I love MC 5 and the Stooges too! Ripperwalk has before claimed to have loved Nirvana, but he must not know anything about them, because they were inspired by Neil Young, who was inspired by the Beatles. Young started Grunge, and is an old dude now and has been for about twenty years, but never the less, the master of grunge! LONG LIVE THE VELVET UNDERGROUND AND THE FACTORY!

Um... Has Ripperwalk ever written a good review on here?

The score below was for the review. This one is for the album.

To people who read the review: Ripperwalk's idiocy most inlike all other Velvet Underground fans. I love the Velvet Underground, personally, but have no agenda to write reviews acting like Stevo from 'SLC Punk!'.

To Ripperwalk: Try auditioning for MTV. They love hosts who dont know shit about music and say mindless things.

this comment made me laugh:

"the Velvets and their pansy-ass crying in the corner style"

right, right... you really sound like someone that knows a lot about the VU. you sound like a fucking meathead.

guess what, i love MC5 and the stooges (kick out the jams and the stooges first 2 albums are some of my favorite records ever) and i recognize that they had a major impact on punk music as well. sure, the VU didn't have the aggression of those bands but who cares? punk rock is and was so much more than just mindless aggression.

i bet my favorite bands could beat up your favorite bands.

Hmmm, that is probably the most intelligent comment so far...

how can you say for definite who influenced punk rock and who didn't? basically all were doing is talking about bands we like and like to consider formative on punk. its too big of a question to answer adequatley and accuratley. was vu influential on punk? prolly to some punks and not to others. the beatles, to some not to others. elvis to some,not to others. jophnny cash to some and not others, bob dylan to some and not to others.

all thats going here is we got a lot of people going " i like band/performer X and i like punk rcok, so band/performer x had to have an influence on punk or else my cred is threatened."

its a joke, because if i'm a punk, then whatever influences me also influences punk and the same goes for all.

not related, but to the guy who likes comparing nsync and elvis. true elvis didn't write his own songs, but im pretty sure the majority of pop artists of that day were not expected to write their own songs. so find another comparison that i can shoot down.

elvis was more of a nirvana to 50's era music. he brought what the black groups were doing to the mainstream. while nirvana brought grunge to the mainstream, where bands like the pixies were doing it before.

you will never successfully compare nsync and elvis for the sole fact that elvis was way more controversial than nsync ever wished they could be. end you line of comparison cause its goin nowhere

"Johnny Cash could beat the shit out of the Velvets and their pansy-ass crying in the corner style"

That may be the dumbest thing I have ever read. Is this a wrestling site or punk site? And this from someone who has DEVOTED their life to playing punk rock.

Elvis Presley brought tamer rock & roll to white people.....that's all he did, he had nothing to do with punk rock. I think Chuck Berry and James Brown did more to create rock music than elvis ever did, or ever could if he tried, he seemed like a fake to me. But who cares! These bands weren't "punk rock", The Stooges, VU, MC5, The Doors, and even Jimi Hendrix were the first real people to show the loud, angry, and raw "punk" qualities. Then a decade later the Ramones, The Damned, and the lesser talented Sex Pistols came along and made it a little different and some even, unfortuanately, tried to integrate fashion into it.

First Off, I am not some tough guy who listens to mosh music, but considering I have DEVOTED my life to playing, listening to, and knowing punk rock I don't take kind to it when people insult it. And hey buddy, I own every album from these guys, and I like it, but there is no way that it was even close to starting punk rock. I listen to lots of stuff that isnt straight up punk, I love country music (not this poppy dixie chic shit though) and last i checked it wasn't very easy to "mosh" to Okie From Muskogee or Behind Closed Doors. I like the velvets, but I think that in their time period, a much better band was the Zombies. And rebelliosness wise, The MC5 were the ultimate rebel band for this period, but so was pretty much everyone else. I respect that you think this was the first punk band, but I still think you are an idiot. your opinion, my opinion. Johnny Cash could beat the shit out of the Velvets and their pansy-ass crying in the corner style. And to the Elvis Presley bashers, do some research before you start bashing someone who popularized what would become punk rock. and baggy pants still suck

people liked elvis because he was good looking and could swing his hips and make the girls swwoon, sounds exactly like nsync to me. Plus they dont write their own music.

uh, i dont think elvis stole every song he sang and even if he did whats that got to do with him being the nsync of his time?

yes, elvis was more popular than the more-talented black artists, but i dont believe that was his fault. i chalk it up to the bigotry of the time.

to the tough guy that wrote that long paragraph about how the velvet underground had no influence on punk rock:

have you actually ever even listened to the Velvet Underground? i mean really listened? as far as i'm concerned, they wrote some of the first punk rock songs.

the music is raw, primitive, and noisy. the lyrics are dark, decadent and teeter somewhere between urban story telling and art. i mean, can you honestly listen to a VU record and NOT notice several prime characteristics of punk? if you don't, you've got your head up your ass.

for christ's sake, listen to white light/white heat (the album) and take note of some of the wicked distortion and abrasive guiatar noises. yes, it occasionally sounds a hell of a lot like greg ginn.

"This is okay, it doesn't compare to NFG's DVD "A Story So Far."

bahaha. this is so sad. i hate everyone

I'd have to say this band is cool, they were one of the first to REALLY inspire punk rock (along with The Stooges & MC5).

yeah indie rock is sissy cuss you cant mosh to it and prove your manhood hood, screw any music that isnt just power chords and angry!

and elvis was an offshoot of many GREAT black performers before him. But nobody would buy a record from a "colored" person so Elvis just stole their songs.

Not going to read the comments because frankly... i dont care. This is such a great album for so many reasons. I love the album cover. Andy Warhol is definitley some amazing shit.-BostonMusicGuy

Yeah, that is right, Fuck the motherfucking Beatles. You know what, i never said you had to like only one of them. I personally dont like them. A review is an opinion. I am not telling everybody that you have to like one over the other. I just dont like the Beatles.
I like the VU because they stood for something real, not something commercial.
And the only reason that i compare the two bands is because they were in the same era with completely different sounds.
Sorry you feel the need to call me an idiot because i spoke my own opinion and you dont agree with it.

Baggy pants waste precious fabric. I thought punks weren't wasteful.

good well thought comment

ok ok...to prove my point on how little impact the velvets had on starting punk rock. take the ramones for instance, popularized as the first punk rock band. who were they influenced by? the New York Dolls, who were influenced by the rolling stones, who were influenced by muddy waters, who wasn't influenced by anyone, he was just trying to make his life less miserable. Ok, now to...the sex pistols? they were influenced (outside of being "created" by Malcolm McLaren) by the Heartbreakers/Dolls, the Ramones(yes they were first) and Rickie Hell and the Voidoids(they stole Hell's "look")Sid Vicious even dressed like thunders, and reportedly admired JT so much that he started using heroin to get closer to him.(maybe, maybe not) Ok, another band? hmm....the Clash? The Damned? Generation X? TSOL? The GERMS? Dead Kennedys? Adolescents? BLACK FLAG? Do you actually think BLACK FLAG was inspired by the Velvet Underground? Listen to heroin by the VU, then listen to...hmm how bout "Media Blitz" by the Germs or "I've Had It" by Black Flag. These bands all carried out punk rock and made it popular to kids who needed an escape from Donna Summer and Flock Of Seagulls. IF ANYTHING, the velvets did in inspire someone....that being the INDY ROCK stuff that came out over tha past 10 years or so, such as Pavement, Built To Spill, Modest Mouse, etc. etc. That is not punk, never will be. I am ashamed that so many people cited this band as actually starting such a strong movement that we all (it appears) love and have devoted or lives to. I assume that the reviewer and those who have been pro-VU on this board meant that the Velvets Started the whole rebellion thing. Ummm no thats why I cited the people in my previous post(Cash,Jagger,Rickards,Presley,Berry,Johnson,Waters,Williams)w ho started the rebellion thing before anyone. And yes, to the person below me, people WERE upset about the Beatles' haircuts, but no more upset than they were at Elvis shaking his pelvis or Chuck Berry being black. Ok, im getting off topic so.... The minute that the Velvet Underground had more influence on punk rock than the Dolls or the MC5 or just society in general, that will be the day I throw away my leather jacket, the day I get pants that fit me, the day I stop wearing black and red, the day I cut my hair, that'll be the day that punk rock died because it was overcome by a bunch of sissy indy rock kids.

Yea....Heroin. One of the most chilling songs i've ever heard. Always sends shivers down my spine.
I still love the Beatles.
my own opinion.

to the guy comparing elvis and nsync. your comparison is right only up to a point. elvis was actually ground breaking in what brought to the pop market. in terms white music consumption, the music elvis played was at least novel.

i dont think the same could be said for nsync. nsync was just an offshoot of NKOTB and they were an offshoot of new edition who were an offshoot of the jackson 5.

you're argument maks sense only on the surface, but when you dig deeper its pretty obvious that your comparison falls short.

I take back my comment that anything VU or the first Modern Lovers album are important to the people that read this site. The ignorance of some of the posters is crazy. NO ONE BAND STARTED PUNK ROCK. The Velevet Underground was one of the most influential bands of all time, but their influence today is minimal to the new shit that the "kids" like. How many bands today actually can say the listen to VU regularly or can even name 5 songs? It is cool to like VU if you are in a band. There are few true fans of the band and of Lou. I can honestly say most people do not really get it. But to get some cred, just list VU and you must be a serious musician that should be respected.
I am lost to see how it is more punk to like VU then the Beatles. Maybe I am an old man (27) but who gives a fuck if you like the Beatles, VU, Duran Duran, or any of the shitty bands everyone likes. If you don't like the Beatles or VU, that is fine, but to define yourself as punk beacuse you like on over the other, you are all fooling yourselves.

Stick with NFG, Taking back Sunday, and Used reviews and argue what is more punk between them.

its not childish OR uninformed, its the truth.

The whole lot of you sound like a bunch of 7th graders. The Beatles, the Velvet Underground, and Elvis have been outstanding inspirations on modern music. Because Elvis predates the other aforementioned bands, who's to say that he didn't inspire them? I don't like Elvis either, but to rip on him stating, "Elvis is the nsync of his time," is childish and uninformed.

Great band, but where do you get the balls to say, "Fuck the Beatles?"

I think the Beatles were highly overrated.

But that doesn't mean you should say "fuck the Beatles". They did have a large impact on the music world.

allow me to correct my appaling grammer. you have managed to write one of the worst reviews i have ever READ, not written. there we go

congratulations. you have managed to not only write possibly the worst review i have ever written, but used it to firmly destroy one of the greates albums ever recorded. consider yourself proud

since when is feedback so integral to the history of music that you can use it as the sole basis for saying VU is better than the beatles. i understand the important role it plays in rock and roll, but, give me a break, you better come with something a little more solid if you're gonna throw wild comparisons around like that.

you lost me at "fuck the beatles".

-reeko

the beatles weren't the first musical rebels. there was this genre called jazz that sorta predates the beatles by a bit.

"Although many of VU's songs were about drugs, like the Beatles, but VU also sung of kinky sex, torture and rebellion without sugar coating it so that they become "Radio Friendy Underground.""

The reviewer is an asshole who seems to be hell bent on hating the Beatles. No matter what. Too bad the Beatles were the first musical rebels, in a sense. They were outrageous because of their hair. People hated them for it. Do you think the Velvet Undergound would diss the Beatles? No fucking way! In many instances the VU were inspired by the Beatles. Your own fucking opinion is right. Keep it to yourself, because you are ignorant.

"Fuck the Beatles.

When i want to hear a song about LSD, I will listen to the Beatles. Who did they inspire? Every fucking pop band."

One of the most ignorant things I've ever read on this site, and that's competing with Pat41's praise of shitty pop punk.

The reviewer is obviously way too obsessed with being "punk". I love the Velvet Underground. I also love the Beatles. Why can't you love both? Because you think you're too PUNK to like the Beatles. And maybe they DID inspire pop shite. So fucking what? So did the Velvet Undergound, if they truly "started punk". Look at punk now, why dont you? NoFx is considered the greatest band out there and their immitators are overflowing the pop market (Blink 182, Sum 41, NFG, etc.).

But you won't give the Beatles a chance because you're too "punk". You, reviewer, are a poor example of one of those people who uses SLC Punk! as his bible. Good for you, now please fuck off. Thank you.

MC5 & The Stooges formed in 1965....when did the VU form?

I haven't heard much of the Velvet Underground, but I love the Beatles. So don't fuck them.

you people are idiots. "This started it all, it's all true, fuck the beatles" hey fuck you, this sarted NOTHING.

you are possibly the dumbest person on this site and that is saying quite a bit.

nico sucked, literally. lou reed should've been singing on the songs that she performed on.

This is okay, it doesn't compare to NFG's DVD "A Story So Far."

and that "fuck the beatles" comment sucked.

it's possible to love both the beatles and the velvet underground and be totally aware of the impact and significance of each band.

i love this album but i could have done without nico. reed's songs are the best.

the VU's influence is incalculable, practically every form of underground music can be traced back to this band. there's no arguing that.

what's with the aggressive review though? your tone was kind of unnecessary, i doubt many people disagree with you.

sister ray (yeah i know it's not on this album) is one of my favorite songs ever. 17 minutes of sex, dope, and violence. fucking beautiful.

if your talking about the sound of punk it started with the bubblegum music and girl groups of the early 60's. however, the spirit of rebellion in rock music started with chuckberry, bill haley, etc.

Awesome review.

Chuck Berry, Robert Johnson, etc. inspired rock music (some might say Chuck Berry invented rock music. Others say white people took black music and made it rock music. Whatever floats your boat.) They had little effect on punk rock bands, only an indirect one. Just because I like Bob Dylan doesn't mean I like Woody Guthrie (I do like him, though.) Velvet Underground DEFINITELY had more of an impact on punk rock bands than Berry and Johnson. That's not an opinion. It's a fact.

BEST BAND EVER! Didn't even finish this review yet...I'm in a hurry....BUT

I'm sure it is awesome...you know your shit...

although this album would be better off without nico, still fucking awesome...

They changed rock and roll and punk rock as we know it...

Loaded is my favorite album of all time...

Goddamn...who can get enough of this band?

Thanks for the review!

Jimi

haha "my own personal fucking opinion" haha powerful dude.

Anyway, your review was stupid but I like this album.

Elvis is the nsync of his time, crappy superficial music.

elvis?! he had nothing to do with punk rock. The Stooges and MC5 and VU were the first three "punk rock" bands in my opinion. But I'd say that they were influenced by the Doors, the Rolling Stones, James Brown, and even some of the Beatles. I mean, sure they were a pop rock band. But in that time and today is a completely different story...I mean, shit...The Doors were considered "pop" in the '60's! And they were anything but pop by today's standards.

you people are idiots. "This started it all, it's all true, fuck the beatles" hey fuck you, this sarted NOTHING. Sure, it's a good album. But to say these guys started punk rock? The velvet underground may have INFLUENCED whiny INDY rock, but NEVER punk. you want influence? Look at Chuck Berry,Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters, Elvis Presley, Johnny Cash, Hank Williams,the Rolling Stones and yes, JOHNNY THUNDERS!!! without these people, you would have no ramones, no clash, no sex pistols. Hell, Johnny Thunders can be credited by inspiring the above bands DIRECTLY. you kids need to get out of your hippie ass beatnik world and pick up the REAL stuff, REAL ROCK AND FUCKING ROLL!!!! Velvet Underground? please, you don't even KNOW what punk rock is. And i don't think any of you will until i see someone review LAMF on here.

One of the few "essential" albums. This album should be required-buying for anyone starting a music collection. A remaining staple in my top 10. Absolute perefection. Lou Reed is god. VU is all time fave band.

Quite possibly the band that actually started punk rock. The Ramones, Sex Pistols and Clash took punk rock and took it to a new level, but I dont think these bands would be around if it wasn't for these guys The Televisions, etc.

Why would anyone listen to this if they have New Found Glory and Good Charlotte?

Awesome quote, "Fuck the Beatles".

-sickboi

I love it!
-freedom to oppress

Velvets started it all. Everything they have recorded is a must have. Anything Velvets and the first Modern Lovers album are some of the most important records for anyone reading this site.